How does an electron in orbit not accelerate towards a proton in an atom?

AI Thread Summary
Electrons do not accelerate towards protons in an atom due to the principles of quantum mechanics, which differ significantly from classical mechanics. Unlike planets orbiting stars, electrons exist in probabilistic distributions around the nucleus rather than fixed orbits. The uncertainty principle prevents precise determination of an electron's position and speed, which contributes to its stability in relation to the nucleus. Additionally, the electromagnetic force alone is insufficient to cause an electron to collapse into the proton, as energy must be supplied to overcome the forces at play. Thus, the interaction between electrons and protons is complex and governed by quantum behavior rather than classical gravitational dynamics.
kshah93
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
If the proton in the nucleus of, say a hydrogen atom, exerts an attractive force on an electron that is in orbit, why doesn't the electron move towards the proton? And does this have anything to do with the electric force being the centripetal force?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kshah93 said:
does this have anything to do with the electric force being the centripetal force?

no, it doesn't. that is, you cannot apply the classical mechanics of gravitating bodies to an electron and the nucleus it "orbits"...and i use quotations b/c en electron does not orbit the nucleus of an atom in the traditional sense of a planet orbiting a star for instance. quantum mechanics are required to explain why an electron doesn't plunge radially into the nucleus of an atom, and i do not pretend to know the details myself...i have a very basic understanding of it, and as such could not begin to explain it beyond what I've already said. with that, i did notice another recent thread started by someone who wanted to share what he felt was a very good short video on quantum physics. whether that's true or not, i don't know, but the first few minutes of the video explain (or perhaps under-explains) in layman's terms why an electron does not spiral into the nucleus of an atom via a traditional orbit. here's the thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3240077#post3240077"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
94JZA80 said:
no, it doesn't. that is, you cannot apply the classical mechanics of gravitating bodies to an electron and the nucleus it "orbits"...
QUOTE]

..but classical mechanics can be apllied to earth-monn system, right. Then why doesn't moon collapse on the Earth despite the fact that it is constantly pull by eart diue to its magnetic pull.
 
ank160 said:
94JZA80 said:
no, it doesn't. that is, you cannot apply the classical mechanics of gravitating bodies to an electron and the nucleus it "orbits"...
QUOTE]

..but classical mechanics can be apllied to earth-monn system, right. Then why doesn't moon collapse on the Earth despite the fact that it is constantly pull by eart diue to its magnetic pull.

It's vectors.

The moon is actually moving away from the Earth extremely slowly.

An orbit is actually falling toward and away from an object at the same rate. If you are moving away a tiny bit faster then falling toward, you will one day escape, if you move toward a tiny bit faster then away, you will eventually connect.

BTW it has nothing to do with magnetic pull when it comes to the earth-moon orbit, its gravity.

If for example the Earth was positive, and the moon negative in any meaningful way, the two object would collide faster then you can imagine due to electro-magnetism's incredibly stronger nature compared to gravity.

As I understand it, the reason the electron and proton don't combine is quantum related in this way, first the electron is not really in orbit around the proton of an hydrogen atom, or any other atom like we envision the moon around the earth. The electron, or electrons are in a shell of probalistic distribution around the nucleus. Since the uncertainty principle dictates that we can not know both the location and speed of a particle, this is why the electron can never be verifiably positioned around the nucleus.

So, the whole "lose energy and fall upon the proton" isn't as straightforward as that, secondly, the mass of the proton and the electron are less then the neutron. This has for consequence that you would need to supply energy to make both of them collapse together. The electromagnetic force isn't sufficient for that to happen. So an electron that is in an orbital cloud above a nucleus, can not just lose energy and merge with the proton.

The best known method of combining proton and electron is the massive energy of a super-nova that collapses the iron core of a super giant star into a super dense neutron star. When the star goes super-nova, the energy liberated is stupenduous, thus enabling the combination of proton and electron, thus forming a neutron star.

I hope I managed to answer, within my limited ability, your question.
 
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...
Thread 'Inducing EMF Through a Coil: Understanding Flux'
Thank you for reading my post. I can understand why a change in magnetic flux through a conducting surface would induce an emf, but how does this work when inducing an emf through a coil? How does the flux through the empty space between the wires have an effect on the electrons in the wire itself? In the image below is a coil with a magnetic field going through the space between the wires but not necessarily through the wires themselves. Thank you.
Back
Top